MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977254152 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5145677

Outcomes after corrective surgery for congenital dextro-transposition of the arteries using the arterial switch technique: a scoping systematic review

2020· other· en· W6977254152 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCybernetics and Technology in Society
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertaintyGrading (engineering)Corrective surgeryQuality of evidenceMeta-analysisCardiac surgeryPulmonary arteryEvidence-based medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dextro-transposition of the great arteries (d-TGA) is the most frequent cyanotic congenital heart pathology in neonates. Surgical correction of this condition is possible using the arterial switch operation (ASO) which was first performed by Jatene in 1975. Objectives The aim of this study was to summarise the evidence on short- (less than 1 year), medium- (1–20 years), and long-term (more than 20 years) outcomes of children with d-TGA treated with the ASO. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes were freedom from cardiac reoperations, occurrence of aortic insufficiency, pulmonary stenosis, coronary artery anomalies, neuropsychological development problems and quality of life. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, and reference lists of included articles for studies reporting outcomes after ASO for d-TGA. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done independently by two reviewers. We pooled data using a random-effects meta-analysis of proportions and, where not possible, outcomes were synthesized narratively. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Main results Following ASO for TGA, short-term survival was 92.0% (95% CI 91.0–93.0%; I2 = 85.8%, 151 studies, 30,186 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Medium-term survival was 90.0% (95% CI 89.0–91.0%; I2 = 84.3%, 133 studies; 23,686 participants, moderate certainty evidence), while long-term survival was 87.0% (95% CI 80.0–92.0 %; I2 = 84.5%, 4 studies, 933 participants, very low certainty evidence). Evaluation of the different secondary outcomes also showed satisfactory results in the short, medium and long term. Subgroup analysis suggests slightly higher survival following ASO for TGA in the second surgical era (1998 to 2018) than in the first surgical era (1975 to 1997) in the short and medium term [93.0% (95% CI 92.0–94.0) vs 90.0% (95% CI 89.0–92.0) and 93.0% (95% CI 91.0–94.0) vs 88.0% (87.0–90.0%) respectively] but not in the long term [81.0% (95% CI 76.0–86.0%) vs 89.0% (80.0–95.0%)]. Conclusions Pooled data from many sources suggests that the ASO for d-TGA leads to high rates of survival in the short, medium, and long term.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.010
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicCybernetics and Technology in SocietyFrench-language works237,207